INDIAN RIGHTS AND LAW BEFORE THE FEDERAL DISTRICT COURTS

This study subjects to quantitative analysis the decisional behavior o f U.S. trial judges on the subject of Indian rights and law. Following a general discussion of the status of Native Americans in the U.S. le gal system we focus more specifically on current case law regarding In dian rights and law. Not unexpectedly, there is a great deal of ambigu ity in this legal realm. Since the judicial behavior literature indica tes that ambiguous legal areas are fertile realms for judges to manife st their personal/partisan values in their judicial decisionmaking, we test the hypothesis that judges appointed by Democratic presidents re spond differently to the pleas of Native American petitioners than do their colleagues selected by Republican chief executives. Our findings reveal that judges placed on the bench by a Democratic president are significantly more likely to support the Indian litigant.